re: Sh*tpost: can we stop saying "syntactic sugar"? VIEW POST


A good example of syntactic sugar is the class keyword in JavaScript. It is syntactic sugar for a constructor function. And usually, when saying syntactic sugar, there is the negative connotation of "it's not really necessary" added to it. So, those who like the class syntax don't use the term syntactic sugar for the class keyword and those who don't like it do.


Code of Conduct Report abuse